| On the other hand, I don't know if the WG or W3C allows this, but a way
| to move this forward without disturbing the editor seems to be to ask
| Brian and folks to fork the spec into a tutorial-like Web developer
| version, where the terminology can be tweaked to make sure the least
| people are "confused".
I think it will just add to the confusion. Let's keep one specification, one
name for a single feature.
If the spec editor dislike a proposal so much it don't want to maintain the
spec if the change is done, we've got a problem we need to address another
way than to fork a specification. I'm admirative of Tab's work and I
seriously don't think he would refuse a change if it was accepted by the
majority as a better idea.
| Indeed, this is totally orthogonal. A problem I have with this thread is
| that I can't tell if some feedback is normative or just
| informative/editorial.
Initial intent of this thread was to be editorial (unlike the 'Putting it
all toegether' thread that was a proposal, just like 'Using $foo' one).
However, the [css-variables] threads are so mangled toegether that I would
not assume that follow-up messages (even from myself) preserved the intent.